Rikard Sundling, Stefan Olander, Petter Wallentén, Stephen Burke, Ricardo Bernardo and Åke Blomsterberg
The purpose of this paper is to identify appropriate concepts of multi-active façades for the renovation of multifamily buildings in Sweden and to determine which, if any, are…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to identify appropriate concepts of multi-active façades for the renovation of multifamily buildings in Sweden and to determine which, if any, are financially viable.
Design/methodology/approach
A lifecycle profit (LCP) analysis was used to examine financial viability through a ten-step process, which included identifying concepts, assessing costs and prices, calculating the LCP and performing sensitivity analysis. Two existing buildings – one low rise and the other high rise – were used as reference models.
Findings
The findings were contradictory. Implementing any of the multi-active façade concepts on the high-rise building would be financially beneficial. The opposite was, however, the case for the low-rise building. Two factors causing this contradiction have been identified: the façade material before renovation and the size of the building.
Research limitations/implications
The study is limited to two case buildings situated in Sweden; however, similar buildings represent a significant amount of the existing building stock. Part of the purpose of the study is also to investigate the merits of LCP analysis to evaluate energy-efficient retrofitting. The study implicates the benefits and pitfalls of LCP analysis needed to be considered by researchers and practitioners alike.
Originality/value
The research findings contribute to the understanding of energy-efficient retrofitting of existing multifamily buildings based on prefabricated multi-active façade concepts.
Details
Keywords
The purpose of the study, upon which this paper is based, was to contribute an improved understanding of the vertical extension of buildings, by presenting a development process…
Abstract
Purpose
The purpose of the study, upon which this paper is based, was to contribute an improved understanding of the vertical extension of buildings, by presenting a development process for its implementation in which the key aspects to consider when planning such extensions are highlighted.
Design/methodology/approach
The approach is based on linking the diffusion of innovation together with case study research to stimulate further development in vertically extending buildings. Four cases of vertically extended buildings in Sweden were selected for the study.
Findings
The development process highlights seven key areas for decisions when planning a vertical extension. These areas are: opportunities for vertical extension; strategies for implementation; detailed planning process; concept development; evaluation; building permit; and procurement. The development processes and lessons learnt from each case are presented, covering both success and failure.
Research limitations/implications
The research is based on four cases of vertically extended buildings. The findings offer valuable insights into the development process which should provide the research community with an improved understanding of the challenges faced.
Practical implications
The findings will help planners, housing owners, housing developers and facility managers better understand the conditions that favour successful implementation of vertical extensions.
Originality/value
The paper provides the reader with an understanding of the challenges faced in the vertical extension of a building and the means of overcoming them to create a simplified development process.
Details
Keywords
Rikard Sundling, Åke Blomsterberg and Anne Landin
This paper is based on a study of six similar buildings built in Gothenburg, Sweden, in 1971, which were in urgent need of renovation. A life cycle profit analysis shows how four…
Abstract
Purpose
This paper is based on a study of six similar buildings built in Gothenburg, Sweden, in 1971, which were in urgent need of renovation. A life cycle profit analysis shows how four competing concepts were evaluated to find a financially viable renovation concept; additionally, the environmental impacts of these renovation concepts using a life cycle assessment are presented.
Design/methodology/approach
Four renovation concepts are compared to find the most appropriate concept, namely, minimalist, code-compliant, low-energy and low-energy plus vertical extension concepts. The methods used for comparison are life cycle profit analysis and life cycle impact assessment; the methods used for data gathering included site visits, interviews, document study, co-benefits study and energy simulation.
Findings
The findings show that vertical extension supported the energy-efficient renovation of the buildings and that the combination of low-energy and the vertical extension had the highest return on investment and the lowest environmental impact. The selected concept for renovating the remaining five buildings combined was the low-energy plus vertical extension. Additional benefits from vertical extension include more apartments in central locations for the housing company, a wider variety of apartment layouts and a wider range of tenants. Drawbacks include increased use of infrastructure, green space and common appliances, as well as gentrification.
Originality/value
This study shows how a vertical extension can financially enable an energy-efficient renovation and further lower its environmental impact. Benefits and drawbacks of densification are also highlighted to better understand the implementation of vertically extending a building.